New Poll Shows Lieberman Leading Lamont

[sugapablo]

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) -- Ned Lamont, whose anti-war campaign rattled the political landscape by toppling Sen. Joe Lieberman in Connecticut's Democratic primary, is gaining support among voters - but Lieberman still has an edge, according to a poll released Thursday.

The Quinnipiac University poll has Lieberman leading Lamont among registered voters 49 percent to 38 percent. Republican Alan Schlesinger gets support from 4 percent. Among likely voters, Lieberman was supported by 53 percent, compared to Lamont's 41 percent and Schlesinger's 4 percent.

Lieberman, a nationally known centrist who has been criticized by many Democrats for supporting the war in Iraq and a perceived closeness to President Bush, lost the Aug. 8 Democratic primary by 10,000 votes. Political pundits say the primary was evidence of voters' frustration with the war and predict it could have national political ramifications.

Lieberman's advantage in the general election comes from broad support among unaffiliated and Republican voters. Fifty-three percent of likely voters polled said he deserves to be re-elected, and nearly half doubted that Lamont, a political novice who founded a company that wires college campuses for cable television, has enough experience to be senator.

More: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/CONNECTICUT_SENATE?SITE=PAPIT&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=home.htm

[bdamomma]

1. I hate how they have to smear good people like Ned Lamont

Lieberman should not be re elected.

[dolstein]

47. How can you "smear" someone with a poll?

Frankly, that's bizarre. Were the people who said Lieberman shouldn't be re-elected smearing him?

[GeorgiaDem69]

102. Same question I had

I don't know that a poll smears anyone, unless it asks something like "Why is G. Bush an idiot?"

[trogdor]

2. If national Dems would get behind Lamont...

...like they're supposed to, we wouldn't have this problem. This should have been a slam dunk. Do Senate Dems really want to win, or is governing just too goddamned much work?

Sorry for venting like this, but it's really beginning to piss me off.

[William769]

3. Care to explain?

Most National Dems already have. :eyes:

[Teaser]

6. Not really.

Issuing a one-off statement of support is hardly "support".

[William769]

7. Google is a wonderful tool.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Democrats+who+support+Ned+Lamont.&btnG=Google+Search

[Freddie Stubbs]

9. Their support is mostly symbolic as long as Leiberman is allowed

to keep his committee assignemtns and his seniority. He will keep delivering pork to CT and he will be reelected.

[William769]

10. Why is it you nay sayers won't put up?

Show me where it's only symbolic. I am sick and tired of supposedly Democrats trying to disillusion other Democrats.

[Freddie Stubbs]

15. Because they are allowing Lamont's opponent to continue to

caucus with Democrats, to severe on four Senate committees as a Democrat, and to serve as the ranking ranking Democratic member of one of those committees. These committee assignments enable him to get things done, such as bringing federal dollars to CT. Bringing federal dollars to CT will increase his chances of being reelected. If Senate Democratic leaders were serious about defeating Lieberman, they would take away Lieberman's committee assignments rather than symbolic things like endorsing Lamont or sending Lamont a few thousand dollars.

[Teaser]

17. Forget it Freddy, this guy isn't interested in reason.

nt

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

13. You think three weeks of that is really going to send a message?

C'mon now, how many people in CT are even going to find out about that?

[Freddie Stubbs]

18. Voters will notice when Lieberman holds press conferences announcing

the next great job creating federal project.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

23. You give voters way too much credit.

After 2004, you really think they pick up on such a small detail? You're only kidding yourself if you think it would have any impact.

[Freddie Stubbs]

29. Tell that too all of the politicians famous for pork who

keep getting reelected over and over again.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

30. You show a basic misunderstanding of what pork is.

http://www.congress.org/congressorg/directory/committees.tt?commid=sappr

Do you see Lieberman on that list? I don't. Therefore, his ability to bring home pork isn't all that high in the first place, is it?

[Freddie Stubbs]

36. Serving on the approprations committee is not the only way to aquire pork

Lieberman serves on the Armed Services Committee and is the ranking member of the Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs Committee. Don't think those committees can bring money to CT?

Dodd, Lieberman Announce Critical Funding for Sub Base New London
$4.6 Million Included in House-Senate Appropriations Agreement for Indoor Crane Facility
November 18, 2005
WASHINGTON - Keeping their promise to ensure that Sub Base New London remains the "Submarine Capital of the World," Senators Dodd and Lieberman today announced that they secured $4.6 million for the construction of an indoor submarine crane facility to allow critical submarine maintenance to be conducted at Sub Base New London year-around. The funding was included in the House-Senate version of the Military Construction appropriations bill expected to pass later today.

"Sub Base New London was on life support earlier this year but thankfully, through a lot of hard work and determination, it has been reborn," said Dodd. "This measure continues to invest in its health and its critically important mission by enabling vital submarine maintenance to be conducted unencumbered by weather conditions year-round. That's good news for our national defense and good news for the people of Eastern Connecticut."

"Submarine Base New London is not only vital to Southeastern Connecticut, it plays a critical role in protecting our nation's security," Lieberman said. "In passing this legislation, the Senate is meeting its responsibility to ensure that the brave men and women from Connecticut, and across the country, can brave any storm through repair and maintenance work done at the Submarine Capitol of the World."

Dodd and Lieberman also praised the inclusion of a provision that would increase compensation for disabled veterans living in Connecticut.

Cranes are the primary lifting mechanism for major submarine parts, weapons, periscopes and other necessary items and often become debilitated due to constant exposure to the elements. This facility will extend crane life and allow work to continue safely without concern for inclement weather. Dodd and Lieberman pledged to continue their work to invest significant federal resources in the sub base, helping to ensure its status as a state-of-the-art military facility and prevent it from being targeted for future closure by the Base Realignment and Closure Commission (BRAC).

http://dodd.senate.gov/index.php?q=node/3245

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

39. I work in appropriations. Trust me on this one.

Lieberman has little access to money where he is. And that is absolute chump change you're talking about there.

[sidpleasant]

66. Joe's fans don't understand that he's doing a poor job with the pork

Connecticut is a lousy 49th in federal spending received per dollar of tax paid by residents. The state gets back just 66 cents for every dollar paid to the federal government.

[saigon68]

126. Pork? Joe is a Pig

[Teaser]

16. So you googled some shit?

Oh boy...got me there...

I mean no, you haven't.

So far no Democrats have taken any serious steps to forcing Jomentum out of the primary.

They have offered some trite words of support, and cut a few checks. And your link has dick else to say.

Next time, try debating what I actually said, rather than what you wanted me to have said.

[brentspeak]

22. "So far no Democrats have taken any serious steps to forcing Joe out of.."

"...the primary."

What primary? The Democratic primary is already over, and now there's an upcoming election. And how do you "force" a candidate to not compete in an election?

[William769]

63. And what have you done?

:eyes:

[Bretttido]

132. He's not a nationally known democrat, it doesn't matter what he's done

[nedbal]

123. Yes

[LeahD]

95. Kerry's requesting contributions for Lamont's campaign. n/t

[saracat]

55. NO they haven't .Several Democrats . Salazar and Landriueux

as well as some others have announced they are supporting Liberman. Liberman could well be handing the Senate to the Repugs.

[agio]

96. Landrieux = disappointing

I knew she was a DINO, but still... :(

[Ken Burch]

124. I think we have to cut Landrieu some slack, but only her...

She is probably the only kind of Dem that could win a La. Senate seat until we get rid of Diebold and establish campaign finance reform.

There's NO excuse for Salazar to be pulling this kind of shit, however.

[exlrrp]

4. Me too

Vent all you want to

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

8. This should have been a slam dunk?

You were only kidding yourself if you thought that. All of the polls leading up to the primary showed Lieberman would win the general election. No amount of support was going to change that. The only thing that people really hoped would was the fact that Lamont actually won the primary, but it didn't.

Furthermore, since Lieberman is going to caucus as a Democrat, why the fuck should we waste resources in Connecticut when there are far more important races at hand?

[Rose Siding]

11. The final pre-primary Rasmussen had them tied at 40 in the general

and the final Quinnipiac didn't include a question about the general election. There was reason to hope.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

12. Since when does "hope" equal "slam dunk"?

Especially when you're trying to take down an incumbent, this was never, EVER a slam dunk. It's absolutely laughable to assert otherwise.

[Rose Siding]

25. I was addressing your remark about the polls

-not suggesting anything about a slam dunk, though it isn't unreasonable to imagine that Ned's win would given him some inpetus in the polls.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

26. I'm sorry - I misunderstood.

It wasn't unreasonable to expect a boost, but that wasn't really a given either.

[Catrina]

108. If the Democratic Primary results had been accepted by both

Deomcratic candidates, the GE, with Schlesinger as the Republican candidate, would have been a slam dunk for the winner of the Democratic Primary.Unfortunately there was only one Democrat in the Democratic primary.

Joe is the Republican candidate, backed by Rove, Cheney et al. Schlesinger had 13% in the pre-primary polls, Lieberman 40% and Lamont 40% for the General Election. Joe's support among Democrats has not increased since the primary.

Once Lieberman announced that he would not accept his party's primary results, 9% of Schlesinger's support went to the new Republican candidate. He also got about 3% from more Conservative Independents.

However, the Republican support he has is not that strong and he could lose some of that as the campaign takes off.

The fact is that Lamont has steadily gained support among Democrats going from nowhere to win the primary. Joe's original overall approval rating has shrunk from the 70s to the low 50s. Lamont has the momentum, and the polls show that over 35% of Independents don't yet know Lamont. He can get some of that support.

Once it becomes clear that Joe is the Republican candidate, his Democratic support is likely to start eroding. Lamont has a very good chance of winning this race.

But the real problem with what Lieberman is doing is the harm it can cause to the three other Dems running in CT. And he just doesn't care. He is NOT a Democrat and imo, he has not been one for a very long time. The Democratic leadership need to let it be known that the Party's candidate is Lamont and Lieberman should be asked to step down from any committees he's on and a real Democrat needs to replace him.

[Bretttido]

136. We should throw him out because he bashes Democrats

A DEMOCRAT that bashes democrats is significantly worse than a REPUBLICAN that bashes democrats. The latter is expected.

[Snivi Yllom]

33. Lamont can't win with Dems alone. Period

The math does not work.

[unpossibles]

64. I think it would be more accurate to say that

Lieberman has some of the Democrats and all of the Republicans, which is what could sink Lamont unless Lieberman loses his Dem supporters.

[krkaufman]

51. Yes, voicing support isn't enough.

Leading Dems need to get in there and campaign for Lamont and his positions.

[stray cat]

5. The people of Connecticut will decide

Not the democratic party and not the republican party nor who happens to endorse who. Its up to the people of Connecticut, investigative reporting and how the candidates conduct themselves.

[krkaufman]

52. Well, it *does* matter who endorses and supports Lamont

Especially if those leading Dems supporting Lamont do so on the ground in Connecticut, and emphasize the reasons why.

[bigluckyfeet]

88. To Hell With Joe

My Final Answer

[Edgewater_Joe]

14. The Trend Lines Are GOOD For Lamont, Folks

Look at the numbers for the last poll ...

Lieberman: 49 (51)
Lamont: 38 (27)
Schlesinger: 4 (9)

Lamont's numbers are escalating, while Lieberman's are starting to erode.

The sky is not falling.

[leftupnorth]

19. I agree

There's still lots of time before November, lots of time for traitor Joe to make himself more and more republican everyday. All the folks that voted for hoJoe in the primary are going to turn against him because he is undermining the party, the longer he hangs around, the worse he looks.

I'm not worried, CT voters can't be that stupid!

[goclark]

37. Love It! TRAITOR JOE is the name for that sick little scumbag nt

Let's make that name STICK!

It is so perfect because it sounds like the STORE and then the mind "gets it." :)

[saigon68]

59. I like KILLER JOE myself

All the children's deaths this criminal has helped cause

But then again they don't have blond hair and their parents are brown ISLAMOFASCISTS

[glitch]

76. Especially since becoming more republican as the real republicans lose

support nationwide might not be the best game plan.

[FreeStateDemocrat]

20. Thanks for reading the entire article & putting the info into perspecitve.

[JackORoses]

54. plus

It's really even worse for Lieberman because he picked up 5 Repub points from Schlesinger.
Meaning he actually dropped from 51 to 44.

[buff2]

21. I'll bet 99% of those polled were repukes

Those asswipes will keep LIEberman's numbers up and will help him steal the election in Nov.He's one of "them" and that's a fact.

[Freddie Stubbs]

27. Will they use the electronic voting machines to steal the election?

:shrug:

[station agent]

31. If they have them, they will use them

And polls like this and media coverage like this legitimizes it.

[Freddie Stubbs]

38. CT doesn't use electronic voting machines

State scraps new voting machines



(Hartford-WTNH, Jan. 4, 2006 Updated 5:10 PM ) _ There likely will not be a high-tech voting machine in your future this year. After announcing late last year that Connecticut's 3,300 mechanical, lever-style voting machines could no longer be used, the secretary of the state reversed herself. It's all about a big foul-up by companies bidding for Connecticut's business.

by Chief Capitol Correspondent Mark Davis
The familiar clunking sound of the mechanical, lever style voting machines will be heard once again this fall in all voting places because of the foul-up.

"I am stopping the purchasing process for electronic voting equipment in Connecticut," Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz. "The state will use lever voting machines in the 2006 election."

After a much publicized, public testing of modern electronic voting technology late last year, it was determined that none of the high-tech devices met all of the requirements of new state and federal rules. In addition to being user friendly for those with disabilities, voters must be able to see the entire ballot all at once and there must be a voter verifiable paper record of their vote. Not even one of the machines tested qualified.

more: http://lieberman.senate.gov/newsroom/release.cfm?id=253406&&

[onenote]

53. is that a serious offer of a bet or are you just talking out of your

hat...

[NYCGirl]

24. Lieberman's lead consists of 75% CT Republican likely voters!

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/08/17/liebe...

GOP voters keep Lieberman in the lead

Thanks to overwhelming support from Connecticut Republicans, Joseph Lieberman comes out on top of a new Quinnipiac University poll out today.

Among likely voters, Lieberman leads Democratic nominee Ned Lamont and Republican candidate Alan Schlesinger 53-41-4 percent. It seems that all those Republicans who aren't backing Schlesinger are standing side by side with Lieberman instead. Lieberman, elected three times as a Democratic senator, gets the support of 75 percent of the likely-voting Republicans in Quinnipiac's poll.

"Sen. Lieberman's support among Republicans is nothing short of amazing," said Quinnipiac poll director Douglas Schwartz. "It more than offsets what he has lost among Democrats. As long as Lieberman maintains this kind of support among Republicans, while holding onto a significant number of Democratic votes, the veteran senator will be hard to beat."

That explains why Lamont is working hard to expand his base of support: In an Op-Ed piece in the Wall Street Journal this week -- not exactly required reading for the "angry left" -- Lamont argued that his " career in business" shaped his outlook and prepared him well to serve in the Senate.

Is there time for Lamont to overtake Lieberman? Sure. The November vote is nearly three months away. As CQ Politics noted the other day, only 9 percent of Connecticut voters had heard enough about Lamont to state an opinion about him three months before he beat Lieberman in the Democratic primary. And indeed, Lamont has already made up quite a bit of ground in the three-way race. In Quinnipiac's July poll, Lieberman led Lamont by 24 points in the three-way matchup with Schlesinger. With today's poll, Lamont has cut that lead in half.

[dolstein]

48. What about the 58% of independents who support Lieberman?

NT

[The Magistrate]

67. Clearly, Sir, That Is Where Mr. Lamont Must Concentrate His Campaign

Independent support is almost always soft. Even now, a lot of that is probably a name-recognition factor, and a good show of stump work could shift that figure a good deal in coming weeks.

[quiet.american]

28. So, if Republicans put Lieberman back in, he will caucus with the Dems?

Strange bedfellows indeed. Words escape me to express my utter disgust with what Lieberman is doing all in the name of his compulsive narcissism, or whatever it is.

[flyarm]

78. when did he ever caucus with dems..he has always been a rethug! n/t

[Ravy]

97. He has always caucused with the Dems.

Not sure what he will do if re-elected, but I hope he caucuses with the Democrats.

[Snivi Yllom]

32. Lamont can't win it with Democrats alone, the numbers prove it

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x11362.xml?ReleaseID=948

This is not a small sampling poll

From August 10 - 14, Quinnipiac University surveyed 1,319 Connecticut voters with a margin of error of +/- 2.7 percentage points. The survey includes 1,083 likely voters with a margin of error of +/- 3 percentage points.



"Sen. Lieberman's support among Republicans is nothing short of amazing. It more than offsets what he has lost among Democrats. As long as Lieberman maintains this kind of support among Republicans, while holding onto a significant number of Democratic votes, the veteran Senator will be hard to beat," said Quinnipiac University Poll Director Douglas Schwartz, Ph.D.


"Ned Lamont's Democratic primary win was based on a very small percentage of voters statewide. He must expand beyond this base if he is going to beat Lieberman."

CT voters Lieberman approval rating 55 - 40
CT Likely Voters favorability rating 46 - 30 with 23 percent mixed

Lamont LVs favorability r with 19 percent mixating 25 - 30 , 19 mixeed and 26 no opinion.

CT likely voters 53 - 40 Lieberman deserves reelection

[Catchawave]

34. I agree, it's about the Republicans

This always concerns me with closed primaries. Here in Virginia, we have open primaries, so the GOP f**ks us up from the git go :cry:

[Snivi Yllom]

41. I think it's more about the independents

But the amazing thing in this race is Lieberman is pulling a higher approval rating from Republicans than from independents.

[toopers]

71. That is not really amazing . . .

we have seen it already this election season. This is pretty much what happened with McKinney in Georgia. In their minds the repugs are voting for the lesser of two evils -- in their minds that is Jojo bush monkey.

[JerseygirlCT]

75. It's more than that

CT prides itself on being rational, reasonable...

The state's Republicans are by and large, moderates. Schlesinger is a dope. Lieberman has been moderate and supportive of the GOP on issues that really matter to a great many GOP voters. He's their kind of guy.

Obviously, there are exceptions, but most GOP voters here are not the "red-meat" social conservatives who worship Bush. They're fiscal conservatives, and either socially moderate or somewhat conservative. I imagine you get a whole 'nother world of GOP voters in GA.

[toopers]

101. I think you are right and wrong . . .

If you believe the conventional wisdom regarding the split of the electorate: 33% Dem, 33% Repug, and 33% inde/undec -- that probably applies to every region/state. I would imagine the it is the ranking of the issues that pushes a voter one way or the other, and the importance of those issues may differ from region to region.

[JerseygirlCT]

74. I think you're correct.

It will depend on who turns out, and it will depend on independent support.

GOP votes will go mostly to Lieberman.

But unaffiliated voters are the largest block in the state. Win them over, and Lamont wins.

[paulk]

93. are there any other races in CT that will get Republicans

to the polls? Just curious - in an off year election, turnout is key. Republicans may "vote" in these polls, but will they really be motivated on election day to vote for someone who (despite some opinion to the contrary on DU), is a Democrat?

Lamont's best chance might be a higher than average Democratic turnout coupled with an anemic Republican turnout...

[w4rma]

35. 3 months, Lamont gained 11 pts, LIE gained 2, LIE is a horrible campaigner

3 months.

Remember how quickly Lamont's polls versus LIE rose in the primary.

This is where Lamont should be at this point to beat LIE.

I think LIE has peaked.

[Cha]

73. I read last Feb Lamont had

14points and I'm sure lieman was laughing his big neocon head off.:+

[sjdnb]

40. DNC/some Reps don't get it - petition drive?

I cannot believe there is even ONE, let alone a list of senators endorsing Lieberman in the general election. IMO, if they continue to 'hedge their bets' and/or stick to the 'old boy's network' they are not only going to remain a minority in Congress, they can forget about 2008, too.

Does anyone know if there is an organized effort to petition or email one's disgust with this example of the DNC (I blame them, in part for this 'disconnect') and some Democratic representatives' inability to put the people/country above themselves?

[LynnTheDem]

42. "broad support among republican voters..."

Enough said.

[MrModerate]

43. From Salon: Republicans Keep Lieberman in the Lead

From their "War Room" feature (to read this requires subscription, but the link is http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/)

"Thanks to overwhelming support from Connecticut Republicans, Joseph Lieberman comes out on top of a new Quinnipiac University poll out today.

Among likely voters, Lieberman leads Democratic nominee Ned Lamont and Republican candidate Alan Schlesinger 53-41-4 percent. It seems that all those Republicans who aren't backing Schlesinger are standing side by side with Lieberman instead. Lieberman, elected three times as a Democratic senator, gets the support of 75 percent of the likely-voting Republicans in Quinnipiac's poll.

"Sen. Lieberman's support among Republicans is nothing short of amazing," said Quinnipiac poll director Douglas Schwartz. "It more than offsets what he has lost among Democrats. As long as Lieberman maintains this kind of support among Republicans, while holding onto a significant number of Democratic votes, the veteran senator will be hard to beat."

That explains why Lamont is working hard to expand his base of support: In an Op-Ed piece in the Wall Street Journal this week -- not exactly required reading for the "angry left" -- Lamont argued that his " career in business" shaped his outlook and prepared him well to serve in the Senate.

Is there time for Lamont to overtake Lieberman? Sure. The November vote is nearly three months away. As CQ Politics noted the other day, only 9 percent of Connecticut voters had heard enough about Lamont to state an opinion about him three months before he beat Lieberman in the Democratic primary. And indeed, Lamont has already made up quite a bit of ground in the three-way race. In Quinnipiac's July poll, Lieberman led Lamont by 24 points in the three-way matchup with Schlesinger. With today's poll, Lamont has cut that lead in half.

****

So here's my question: can Lieberman possibly hold onto both Republican and Democratic votes now being said to lean his way? If he says anything about anything, he's going to shed voters from one party or another. I think we'll see his lead slip away pretty quickly.

[Horse with no Name]

44. You know what is really significant?

If I were a lifelong Dem and suddenly had more support from Republicans than I did my own party--it would dawn on me that I obviously was doing something wrong to have garnered this support.

[chaumont58]

45. Lieberman is one of the elite 'beltway insiders'

Dem, schim. He's one of the chosen few. He goes to the right diner parties. He goes to the right cocktail parties. He is Russert's pal, tweety's pal. The beltway whores just love him. Why, what would life be without Senator HolyJoe?

I think he will win. He's going to maintain a certain percentage of his primary voters, and he's going to get puke votes. The pro-war Senator returns in triumph, so will say the WaPo after the election.

The DLC, the best thing the pukes have going for themselves, right now.

[saigon68]

49. HE LOVES HIS DADDY

HE IS A DIRTY FUCKER

[unpossibles]

46. I'd say this is the best indication that he is not a DEM at all

he should just come out of the closet and announce his NeoCon puke status.

Is this the first time that so many Republicans - you know, the people who call us Commies and hate everything we stand for - have voted for a Dem in such numbers? Is that rotten fish I smell?

[RatRacer]

56. Pragmatism

They know the Repuke hasn't a chance in hell of winning and to them Lieberman is better than the alternative. If a viable candidate from their own ranks were in it, Joe's ploy wouldn't do a thing because they'd vote for their own.

[napi21]

50. They read this on cspan this AM. HOWEVER they also added

that in the last q-poll Lamont was only polling in the low 20's, so this poll shows a marked INCREASE in his support in a short time!

[daleo]

57. I thought Lieberman was pretty liberal on non-war issues

Well, I have heard that claim being made, anyway. If so, won't Republican voters have second thoughts about him? Cheap labor Republicans, I mean, as opposed to single issue warhawks.

[dolstein]

58. He is, but DU is a "truth free zone" as far as Lieberman's

record on domestic issues is concerned. That said, if you were a Republican, and you had to choose between a very liberal Democrat whose supporters say that all Republicans are evil, or a moderate Democrat who embraces bipartisanship, who would YOU vote for?

[daleo]

60. Couldn't they just choose the Republican?

But if they can stick to "strategic voting", then I suppose they would go for Lieberman.

[MercutioATC]

86. Quite a few of us see Lamont as moderate, not "very liberal".

In fact, what "very liberal" positions do you believe he holds?

[TankLV]

111. The Democrat - you know, the one who is RUNNING AS A DEMOCRAT.

the NOMINEE OF THE DEMOCRAT PARTY.

as opposed to the one RUNING AGAINS the Democrat.
and who CRITICIZES OTHER DEMOCRATS for CRITICIZING REPUKES.

You know.

But yet you continue to spew your bullshit.

LIEberman has done more to UNDERMINE the Democratic Party in the past 6 year than ANYBODY ELSE.

Stop with the LIEberman LIES - he's stopped voting "90%" long ago - in fact, I bet it's more the OPPOSITE for the past 6 years...

[KaptBunnyPants]

69. Not really.

He's a free-trader, supporting both Nafta and Cafta. He voted for the bill to strip bankrupcy protections from poor people. He signalled support for privatizing social security, until that became so unpopular that he was forced to recant his position temporarily. He's anti-affirmative action. He's a moralist who attacks Hollywood, rap music, and video games as the causes of moral degradation in our society, going so far as to attack Marilyn Manson for Columbine. He's a corporatist, leading the defense of accounting practices that led to Enron. He's relatively anti-gun control, as he supports background checks and trigger locks but opposes registry's of gun owners and lawsuits against gun manufacturers. He supported welfare reform. He supported federal funding of religous services. He voted for cloture of Alito, a hard right supreme court justice in the mold of Scalia. I'm running out of time, but I think you get the drift.

I'm not seeing a lot we can really attack him on in so far as stripping him of Republican support. Bush, Cheney, Melham, and the NRSC all support Lieberman, and he has been pretty good for their causes. We are better off just treating him like the Republican candidate and go from there, this is Conneticutt after all. Bush isn't popular here and neither are Republicans.

[The Gunslinger]

104. Thank you

I can't believe how many Dems are supporting Independent Joe who is endorsed by the Republican party. Fox news might say its about the war only, but Joe
is loyal to many of the Republic party's ideals.

[JerseygirlCT]

77. He's got a mixed record. Nothing harsh enough to turn off

GOP voters.

He's got gaps that trouble Dem voters, however. And I think more than anything (with the possible exception of the war), his arrogance over the past several years has been turning off many constituents.

[Psephos]

118. Except for the war, he has a good liberal voting record

Good point, Daleo.

His lifetime rating from Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) is 76. His lifetime rating from the Christian Coalition is 0.

It's perfectly cool to barbecue him over the war, but uncool to smear the liberal cred he's earned over many years of usually progressive votes. Listen to the rhetoric around here lately and you get the impression he's the reincarnation of Strom Thurmond. Yet six years ago he was our V.P. candidate, and oh, how the honey did flow then.

Pitchforks and torches give me the creeps.

Peace.

[Placebo]

61. Yikes!

This gap can definitely be closed, but it's gonna be tough.

[hedgehog]

62. Is Lieberman actually on the ballot yet?

The last I heard, his petitions had about a 50% rejection rate so it wasn't a certainty that he'd qualify as an independent.

[Janice325]

65. Thanks for adding that, hedgehog.

I was just about to ask that, but you beat me to it.
I really hope his petition is thrown out with a HUGE rejection rate.

[lynne]

137. YES - He's on, there was a thread about that last week, I think.

[tblue37]

68. Many independents may have

ignored the issues in the Democratic primary, so they might not realize how closely Lieberdweeb is tied to BushCo and the disastrous, criminal occupation of Iraq. They need to be made very aware of these things.

[Rex]

70. HAHAHA...Joe's lost his mind.

How sad/funny.

[barb162]

98. How so?

[Tiggeroshii]

72. I think it'll tighten within the next two months.

Lamont has a good campaign going and some dEmocrats are still a little slow on it. They'll catch on, methinks.

[RobertSeattle]

79. Give it a couple of weeks

When the "Losermann" meme sets in I think Lamont will go over 50%.

[FreeStateDemocrat]

80. Right Edwards is in Ct campaigning w/ Lamont today look for bounce later.

[Kolesar]

81. Time for another debate, boys? .. eom ..

[bluestateguy]

82. Lamont is winning

nt

[dolstein]

106. If by "winning" you mean "losing", then you'd be correct

Geez, if trailing by 12 points is winning, then Joe won the primary in a landslide.

[fujiyama]

83. Lieberman is a narsisistic bastard

but this will certainly be a tough race, not that anyone should have expected anything else. He is the defacto republican candidate at this point.

As Magistrate and Snivi stated though, independants are where Lamont will have to focus his campaign - them and the remaining democrats that are holding out. Some are unlikely to sway from Lieberman, but there is still some hope I believe.

Lieberman is actually decent for a NE *republican* and for the party faithfuls out there, he supports Bush's foreign policy to such a large extent, so little else matters. At the same time, he doesn't scare moderate republicans since he's still pro choice and pretty decent on the environment. He has a better record than Spectar, Collins, and Snowe on most issues. He's somewhat closer to Chafee I'd say, though definetely closer to Bush in terms of FP. Ideally both would get their asses kicked this November, but as we've seen with Maine, it's tough getting rid of "moderate independant" incumbents, even if they support a neocon foregn policy. People buy into "bipartisanship" bullshit as we've seen in the past as well, not realizing that it's impossible to compromise with fascists.

[barb162]

99. "People buy into "bipartisanship"

because it's often better than polarization?

[TankLV]

113. I'd say not cooperating with EVIL is the better choice.

The other side is not just "another opinion" - they have and are destroying our country and the rest of the world.

This has not been a "gentlemens fight" with "roberts rules of order" for a long time now...

"Bipartisan" bullshit is what got us into this mess.

The active definition of "bipartisanship" is for one to agree with ALL the repukes crap - WITHOUT COMPROMISES OR CHANGES - otherwise, one is "partisan".

The country is SICK of "bipartisanship".

The country wants a damn OPPOSITION PARTY!

[IndianaGreen]

84. John Edwards will campaign with Lamont, and Kerry is raising money

for him. The battlelines are drawn, and we must help Lamont even if it is with a couple of bucks here and there. We can't let the GOP and the war wing of the Democratic Party subvert the will of the primary voters.

[David Zephyr]

85. Aren't you all getting tired of the "anti-war candidate" drapery?

It's the corporate media's circling the wagons to make Lamont a "single-issue" candidate.

Reject the language. Protest the language. Expose the language.

[Psephos]

89. So true. n/t

[Gloria]

87. "experience to be a Senator"--what, was Lieb BORN with it??

I hate that sort of crap...I bet it was a question put there by someone who thinks its vital...

PS-The Republican Senate Re-election Committee is supporting Lieberman (I think that's what it's called).....let the money roll in...

[yurbud]

90. Dems have to break his centrist shtick: he's a right wing demagogue

who dangerously enables the Bushies.

The sooner they figure out how to say that, the sooner Joe will be a footnote selling coffins to little old ladies.

[dolstein]

107. a right wing demogogue who votes like a liberal Democrat

that's an interesting combination, no?

[TankLV]

114. Again, only in your sick fanatsies.

Read the posts that prove otherwise.

Why do you ignore all the times he's CRITICIZED OTHER DEMS FOR DARING TO CRITICIZE THE WAR CRIMINAL?!

Why do you ignore all the SUPPORT HE'S CONTINUALLY GIVING THIS WAR CRIMINAL ADMINISTRATION?!

Why do you continue to ignore the fact that he is RUNNING AGAINST THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE HE LOST TO?!?!

And take your head out of your ass and smell the coffee...

[Puglover]

130. Correction.

His head is up Liebermans ass. Everytime someone dares to post anything positive about Lamont this guy is on it. He must have taken over for someone who is no longer with us.

[Ken Burch]

142. Gee...who would THAT be, I wonder...

:yourock:

[Zodiak]

144. Does this look like a liberal record?

1. He voted for Condi
2. He voted for Gonzales
3. He voted to take class action lawsuit rights away
4. He voted for Negroponte
5. He voted for the Cheney Energy Bill
6. He voted for CAFTA
7. He did not stand up for voting rights in Ohio
8. He voted for cloture on Alito
8. He voted to extend the Patriot Act
9. He voted for the US-Oman free trade agreement
10. He voted for Roberts

Leiberman does NOT vote like a liberal. That meme is a BS talking point that has been debunked many times, even on this thread.

Your talking points are dishonest, dolstein. I do not appreciate them coming from Republicans and I sure as hell do not appreciate them coming from proported Democrats.

Promote Leiberman on another website because it is not allowed here.

[screenplaya]

91. Lieberman is a lifetime politician.

His whole life has been about politics, which is sad cause he sucks at it.

Here is a quote from the NY Times in 1981:

"Joseph I. Lieberman of New Haven gave up the position of majority leader of the State Senate for an unsuccessful run for the United States House of Representatives. He returns to New Haven to practice law and bide his time".

I guess that's why he refused to give up his senate seat in 2000, he'd already been burned.

[Boo Boo]

92. A month ago Quinnipiac showed Lieberman with a 24 pt. lead when

running as an independent.

July 20, 2006
Lieberman -- 51
Lamont -- 27
Schlesinger -- 9

Compared to now:

August 17, 2006
Lieberman -- 53
Lamont -- 41
Schlesinger -- 4

Among registered voters the current poll is actually Lieberman: 49, Lamont: 38, and Schlesinger: 4, which is an 11 point lead for Lieberman. In any case, the lead is far less for Lieberman than it was a month ago. I think Lieberman has just about all the votes he's going to get and actually stands to lose votes, whereas Lamont can still make gains among Democrats.

This poll doesn't seem like anything to get worried about to me. The interesting polls will be the next couple of months where we will see if Lamont continues to erode Lieberman's Dem support, or whether he's maxed out. Lieberman is promising to caucus with Dems if elected in an attempt to stop the bleeding, and perhaps keep the DSCC, DNC, et al from going all out behind Lamont for fear of pissing off Lieberman and changing his mind about who he chooses to caucus with.

If Lamont can cut the gap in half again by the next polling, then I think he'll just roll right over Lieberman. He needs to keep courting CT Dems with everything he's got. His "I'm an entrepreneur" piece in the WSJ was a good start. He's got the anti-war vote, now he needs to go after the rest.

Fingers crossed.

[against all enemies]

94. Republican papers and advocates are backing Lieberman. When

will the Democrats still supporting Lieberman realize that Cheney and Rove are backing Lieberman and that Democrats shouldn't?

[The Gunslinger]

105. Bingo!!

[Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel]

100. Name recognition

That's all it is folks.

[many a good man]

103. Poor Lamont. Has to run against not one, but TWO Republicans!

Reid ought to say Lieberman won't get appointed to Senate bathroom attendant if he beats Lamont.

[nedbal]

109. it's far better to have a dino incumbent

that is a sure win in november than give an opening to loose a dem seat.

it was a big mistake to oust liberman , before polls showed Ned would win by > 70%
. not untill the dems have 60% of the seats

[w4rma]

119. LIE has to go. He is self centered scum. (nt)

[killbotfactory]

110. And if the elections were held on the 17th of August

this would mean something.

[tblue37]

112. They keep calling him a "centrist." He is not a

centrist or a moderate--he is a right wing stooge.

[dolstein]

116. He's actually left of center

John Breaux and Sam Nunn were centrists. On the Republican side, I would consider Spector, Collins and Snowe centrists. All of these people have more conservative voting records than Lieberman.

[Ken Burch]

125. What part of

"If you lose the Democratic primary and then run AGAINST the Democratic candidate you AREN'T a Democrat anymore" do you not understand, dolstein?

You're very close to violating DU rules here, and you know it.

[leesa]

115. How long will this be on breaking news??

[nedbal]

117. A Long time I hope, we could/will/did lose a sure dem Senate seat

a dino seat is still a dem seat we need every dino seat we can get at this point

[w4rma]

120. LIE will accept the Defense Secretary position from Bush in 1 year.

And a Republican governor will appoint his replacement. LIE is not a stable seat holder.

At this point LIE is just trying to do as much damage to Democrats as he can on the way out, exactly like Zell did.

[leesa]

121. Yes, and if Lieberman gets his ass out of there it will still be a Dem

seat with a REAL Dem in it.

[nedbal]

122. All we need is for all the repubs to get their ass out of there ...

and we got it made...

it was a bad political move at this time to kick out a dino and possibily loose a dem seat







one of the few bookmarked articles I have

WilliamPitt Mon Jul-10-06 02:07 PM
Original message
Just a reminder Updated at 12:38 PM

Edited on Mon Jul-10-06 02:19 PM by WilliamPitt
that if the Democrat running for the House and/or Senate in your district is a piece of crap, you should vote for them because you aren't voting for *them.*

You're voting for a recapturing of the majority by the Democrats.

You're voting for the removal of people like Frist and Hastert from power.

You're voting for the recapturing of the Intelligence Committee, the Finance Committee, the Armed Services Committee, the Ways and Means Committee, the Government Oversight Committee, and a dozen other committees of unbelievably substantial power.

You're voting to give subpoena power to John Conyers, Henry Waxman and Barney Frank.

You're voting for the ability to stop judicial nominees...and remember that Justice Stevens is 86 years old and not much longer for the world. You're voting to make sure another Roberts/Alito clone isn't elevated to the highest bench.

Just a friendly reminder.

One last edit, perhaps a snooty one, but it needs saying.

Responsible voting has nothing whatsoever to do with making you feel good about yourself or burnishing your liberal credentials. If you vote because you want to respect yourself in the morning, you are not being responsible to the country. This is a "we" deal, and this is also politics, which is a dirty business requiring multiple, constant and ever-present compromises.

Vote for majority control, no matter which individual Democrat you cast a ballot for. That is the responsible thing to do.

[w4rma]

127. Lieberman - not backing Dem candidates for House in CT

"Non-Combatant" Lieberman Won't Back Democratic Candidates
by Melinda Tuhus | August 25, 2006 06:15 PM

Declaring himself a "non-combatant," U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman, in remarks at a New Haven press event Friday, raised anew the question of whether his "independent" candidacy will help Republicans hold onto three Congressional seats in Connecticut -- and control of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Lieberman -- who after losing an Aug. 8 Democratic primary to Ned Lamont has launched a third-party bid to hold onto his seat in the Nov. 7 general election -- was asked whether he still endorses Diane Farrell, Joe Courtney and Chris Murphy, three Democrats looking to unseat endangered Republican incumbents Chris Shays, Rob Simmons and Nancy Johnson.

“I’m a non-combatant,” Lieberman declared. “I am not going to be involved in other campaigns. I think it’s better if I just focus on my own race.”

Lieberman made the remarks at a Friday morning photo op held in the rain under an I-95 overpass in the Fair Haven neighborhood to tout his role in bringing $50 million to the state to help ease transportation gridlock.

“It’s a little awkward for me now” to endorse the Democratic candidates in the general election, he said, “since they all endorsed my opponent,” Democratic primary winner Ned Lamont.
…
http://www.newhavenindependent.org/archives/2006/08/noncombatant_jo.php
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2798632

[saigon68]

128. He is a TRAITOR like Zell "Pig boy" Miller

[nolabels]

129. The world has plenty of maggots and other bottom feeders

Even if somehow Joe is gotten rid of, the corporate controlled media will find another to play against the rest of us.

The chandelier in a hotel doesn't hold up the building but just about everybody will ignore the crumbling mortar that holds the chandelier up if the building owners keep feeding it electricity.

The Democratic party can no more divorce Joe from the party than they can rewrite history. This is same guy the DLC chose to inflict it's brand of morality against others who might choose differently. The iconoclastic smaller states holding the rest of nation hostage with the blunt instrument of a Senate is of same energy that powers the moth to the light.

We, the entertainment culture, are being vulcanized by our own desires to control others. Everybody is getting what they want except the majority, so don't look for this to end anytime soon.

[saigon68]

131. He is a big whiner you have to admit

That nasal whine of his is getting old.

[nolabels]

140. The people of Conn. are going to wake up surprised if they re-elect Joe

Most of them probably don't realize how many sugar coatings Corporate media is giving this guy. The people of Conn. who think they are getting something unique from their man Joe will wake up one day to find all that attention gone and this bitter ole ideologue in one of their Senate seats.

The people who say Joe is a Republican should realize he is not even that. Joe sold his soul to the multinational corporations a long time ago. Joe existence and essence is a prototype corporate installed government goon. What the corporate click is doing with Joe in Conn. is almost a carbon copy of what they did with Arnold over here in Calif.

[saigon68]

143. He has sold his soul to israel Too

[nolabels]

147. Israel is just another dupe and or back drop to the arms trade

The notion of nation state has long been used by royalty, kings and other title to stiffle common ground. At best Israel is a cleint state, but more realisticly they seem to be are a unregulated appendage of D.C. The reason we don't hear from people in Israel who don't want or need war is that peace don't pay the bills for the rest of them. Getting back to being a goon for the U.S corporate/government enterprise, it's quite easy to see why Joe and a whole lot of other folks swallow what ever come out from that whole culture. I would say that arms being a number one export for the U.S., following the money is just plain as day when it comes for looking for the imputetus.


The Israel Lobby: How Powerful is it Really?

Commentary: Breaking down the real relationship between U.S. foreign policy, Israel, and the spectrum of pro-Israel advocacy groups.

By Stephen Zunes

May 18, 2006

(snip)
It is always welcome and significant when traditional conservatives, hawks, and others in the foreign policy establishment speak out against specific manifestations of U.S. foreign policy, such as when Mearsheimer and Walt joined other prominent conservatives in academia in opposing the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq. However, such realist opposition grows not out of concern over any of the important moral or legal questions but out of a rational calculation that a particular war could lead to greater instability and thereby run counter to America's national security interests. Indeed, Israel's violation of international legal norms and its impact on the civilian population in the occupied territories are mentioned in the article primarily as a means to counter claims that U.S. policy in support of the Israeli government is based upon a moral imperative.

What progressive supporters of Mearsheimer and Walt's analysis seem to ignore is that both men have a vested interest in absolving from responsibility the foreign policy establishment that they have served so loyally all these years. Israel and its supporters are essentially being used as convenient scapegoats for America's disastrous policies in the Middle East. And though they avoid falling into simplistic, anti-Semitic, conspiratorial notions regarding Jewish power and influence for the failures of U.S. Middle East policy, it is nevertheless disturbing that the primary culprits they cite are largely Jewish individuals and organizations.

Also problematic are the article's references to U.S. Middle East policy resulting in part from the influence of “Jewish voters,” since most American Jews take more moderate positions regarding Iraq, Iran, and Palestine than does Congress or the Bush administration. Similarly, while Mearsheimer and Walt do not claim that the Israel lobby is monolithic or centrally directed, they fail to emphasize how not all pro-Israel groups support the policies of the Israeli government, particularly its right-wing administrations. Groups like Americans for Peace Now, the Tikkun Community, Brit Tzedek v' Shalom, and the Israel Policy Forum all identify themselves as pro-Israel but oppose the occupation, the settlements, the separation wall, and Washington's unconditional support for Israeli policies.
(snip)
http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/columns/2006/05/the_israel_lobby.html

[saigon68]

149. I see your point

There are a lot of distractions going on in the middle east.

Follow the money

[Zodiak]

145. Your pants get "loose" when you lose weight

and you can "lose" a football game.

And people who know the difference between these two words are more likely to be heard when they appoint themselves to lecture DU about responsibility.

[Name removed]

133. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

134. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

135. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[wisteria]

138. Lamont offers change, Lieberman offers the same bloody course.

Besides, Lieberman has not been much of a Democrat in the past couple of years. He has be trying so hard to make a name for himself as a maverick-like McCain, that he has sometimes screwed the Democratic party doing it. He latest moves indicate that he is the party of Lieberman first.

[AtomicKitten]

139. Correction .... Lieberman is not the Democratic candidate.

That was determined by CT voters. The Democratic candidate is Ned Lamont.

[leesa]

141. This is an old poll, silly

[PATRICK]

146. Political assessment

The same situation applies when Lieberman was leading in the primary race. This is a new ballgame but the same players, one swinging wildly in a slump. Setting aside the new set of worries about Republican voters(but note the unfamiliarity with Lamont and his "lack of experience") one notes that Lieberman has lost his Democratic base, machinery and belatedly, even openly might have to use GOP advisers and machinery. Faust on life supports.

One need not fear that a sudden burst of political genius and competence will crest on the wave of hubris. Meanwhile Lamont seems to be adapting his message for the next hill to climb just as head-in-cloud Sen. L. is slipping on summit ice. Fear is good spice for a new effort since unrealistic overconfidence also misses the point. Work to done, especially money to be raised. Lieberman has been hording funds since the day he knew he was going to lose. That situation will swing back to Lamont too and the best Se. L. can hope for is the clock running out on the inevitable shift. Still he makes gaffes and gratuitous digs into his own well, self-excavated, political grave.

Not knowing the state politics, which are going to get more more complex, I still think that the big swings- as dizzying and scary as they are, are not untypical of a controversial, confused race and will change drastically- and not in favor of the political boob. Every advantage Sen L. carries has a downswing and predictable decline. By the time the GOP might dare to sneak in a last minute infusion of massive TV funding or dirt, it probably will be too late and not worth the risk.

If one can say it is Sen. L's race to lose he has shown and is showing he has every capability and intention of doing so, fixed in his own headstone. That kind of losing way has a way of rendering his type of high class friends very invisible and their pocketbooks very tightly shut.

If you want a truly idiotic, unstudied handicap I will say Lamont by 6% as things stand now. Totally absurd to make an actual prognostication but some need comfort from some quarter.

[saigon68]

148. K&R